Hi folks:
I have a tendency to espouse librarian-teaching of "critical thinking"
(like you were not aware of that!), so I thought an example would be
useful.
There is an interesting and brief news article at
http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/special_report/library-taxes-closed-20100628
which could be used as an exercise.
The article is entitled: "Are Libraries Necessary, or a Waste of Tax
Money?". The idea would be to facilitate discussion, not of the topic
itself, but of how many different intentions of the author and
interpretations of the content *might* be *posasible.*
In addition, there would be discussion of how to respond constructively
to such an article, factually and in brief (people only listen to
sound-bites these days), without being defensive or ignoring the
aforementioned "possibilities." For example, might a reader misconstrue the
intent of the author for any reason, and might that be a more important
point of response than the topic itself?
Cheers!
jgm
John G. Marr
Cataloger
CDS, UL
Univ. of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM 87131
jmarr_at_unm.edu
jmarr_at_flash.net
**There are only 2 kinds of thinking: "out of the box" and "outside
the box."
Opinions belong exclusively to the individuals expressing them, but
sharing is permitted.
Received on Wed Aug 03 2011 - 18:02:17 EDT